Skip to main content

It's Official: Google is Evil

Unless you've been living under a rock for the last 24 hours, you've no doubt heard about (if not read) Ars Technica's story "Google's dropping H.264 from Chrome a step backward for openness". After 19 hours on the site, the story has generated 552 comments. A link to the story on Slashdot, in which the Slashdot story poster wrote the introduction as an ad hominem abuse of the Ars Technica author, has already garnered 751 comments.

All this started when Google annouced 11 January it would drop support for H.264 encoded video via the HTML5 video tag within Chrome. Going forward they'll only support "open" video codecs, which currently amount to Theora and Google's own WebM. The repercussions of their unilateral decision have echoed around the far corners of the Internets ever since.

Let me state up front that I agree completely with every point raised in the Ars Technica article. I can't add much more to that other than additional "illumination" to some points raised by Peter Bright and counterpoints raised by his legion of detractors.

Just because you've announced that your codec is supported by "Mozilla, Opera, Adobe, Google and more than forty other publishers, software and hardware vendors" doesn't make you a serious contender. To be a serious contender, you have to have design wins, especially with the silicon being manufactured to support your codec. Next, you have to manufacture devices, ship them, market them, and hope they're adopted in sufficient numbers to make a decent return on investment. And then you need to wait.

And while you wait for these devices to make their way into consumer's hands, you must never forget that there's a huge mountain of existing merchandise that people are currently using and quite happy with, and will be for some time to come. And all that hardware supports H.264 and only H.264.

Oh. And let's not forget Flash, which His Jobness has tried valiantly to slay, but remains at large with a 97% installed base. And, of course, it uses H.264.

I believe Google is being influenced by their perceived success with Android. According to the trade press, it looks like Android is beating Apple six ways to Sunday, at least in the American mobile market (although perhaps not so much in Europe). This is because there has been, up until now, one and only one place to officially buy and use your iPhone: AT&T. But all that's going to change in February when Verizon starts to ship its very own iPhone. And when that happens, Android handset makers may get an unpleasant surprise; a flattening, if not an outright drop in sales, at least on Verizon.

But right now Google feels on top of the world, and thus feels emboldened enough to make this change in codec support within Chrome. Sure, there'll be some wailing and gnashing of teeth, but The Google overlords figure it will pass quickly and The Google can continue with its plans for dominating web video.

If only it were that simple.

This act also reminds me of some of the shenanigans that landed Microsoft in hot water with the DoJ back in the 1990s. Which, if the same thing were to happen to The Google, would be ironic, considering how The Google is all for open standards and an open web and choice. Especially choice. How so typically New Speak-ish of The Google to tell me they are helping me by limiting my choices through their non-support of H.264. I'm so happy somebody at The Google made the decision for me.

I, for one, am looking forward to our new Internet masters.


Popular posts from this blog

cat-in-a-box channels greta garbo

So I'm sitting at my computer, when I start to notice a racket in back. I ignore it for a while until I hear a load "thump!", as if something had been dropped on the floor, followed by a lot of loud rattling. I turn around and see Lucy in the box just having a grand old time, rolling around and rattling that box a good one. I grab the GX1 and snap a few shots before she notices me and the camera, then leaps out and back into her chair (which used to be my chair before she decided it was her chair).

Just like caring for Katie my black Lab taught me about dogs, caring for Lucy is teaching me about cats. She finds me fascinating, as I do her. And she expresses great affection and love toward me without coaxing. I try to return the affection and love, but she is a cat, and she takes a bat at me on occasion, although I think that's just her being playful. She always has her claws in when she does that.

She sits next to me during the evening in her chair while I sit in mi…

vm networking problem fixed

Over the weekend I upgraded to Windows 8.1, then discovered that networking for the virtual machines wouldn't work. Then I tried something incredibly simple and fixed the problem.

Checking the system I noticed that three VMware Windows services weren't running; VMnetDHCP, VMUSBArbService, and VMwareNatService. VMware Player allows you to install, remove, or fix an existing installation. I chose to try fixing the installation, and that fixed the problem. The services were re-installed/restarted, and the virtual machines had networking again.

Once network connectivity was established there was exactly one updated file for Ubuntu 13.10, a data file. This underscores how solid and finished the release was this time. Every other version of every other Linux installation I've ever dealt with has always been succeeded by boatloads of updates after the initial installation. But not this time.

Everything is working properly on my notebook. All's right with the world.

sony's pivotal mirrorless move

I'm a died-in-the-wool technologist, even when it comes to photography. I have always been fascinated with the technology that goes into manufacturing any camera, from the lenses (optics) through the mechanical construction, the electronics involved, and especially the chemistry of the film and the sophistication of the digital sensor. It's amazing that the camera can do all it's asked of it, regardless of manufacturer.

Of all the types of cameras that I've really taken an interest in, contemporary mirrorless (again, regardless of manufacturer) are the most interesting because of the challenging problems the scientists and engineers have had to solve in order to build a compact but highly functional camera. In particular I've followed the sensor advances over the years and watched image quality climb (especially with μ4:3rds) to exceed film and rival one another such that there's very little difference any more as you move from the smaller sensors such as 4:3r…